Is there such a thing as religious harassment?
To a great extent, the answer to this question depends on local laws or
interpretation of laws. In some nations, the majority religion is allowed to
proselytize to the extreme, in other nations any form of “religious noise pollution”
would be considered harassment. To a great extent, the answer to this question is
in the mouth of the speaker, the eyes of the law and the ears of the listener. Using
our definition of harassment (on the part of the perpetrator) as the repeated
refusal to accept “no” for an answer, if the missionary is targeting a particular
person who does not wish to listen, then that would be considered harassment. If
on the other hand, it is merely a speech not directed toward any one individual,
that communication may be annoyance but not harassment.
. At what point do the airport employees step into protect the passenger’s right of
privacy?
The employee’s response may be based on the principle of harassment. If
passengers are asking to be allowed to be alone, then this may be an issue of
harassment. Needless to say, how much freedom of speech is permitted depends
on a nation’s laws and local custom. In the USA, not every action is protected
under freedom of religion (one cannot use hard drugs as a religious exercise), and
the harassment may fall under noise pollution laws. Employees should enter into
this issue only after passengers have complained.
. Should this form of religious expression be protected or challenged on an
international basis or on a country-by-country basis?
There is almost zero possibility that there will be an international agreement on
such an issue. Religious differences are simply too great. Instead this form of
religious protection or expression will have to be based on a nation-by-nation
status.